Humboldt County supervisors urge solution in 101 corridor project

The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously on Tuesday to urge the state Coastal Commission to not take any action at Thursday's federal hearing that may send the entire Eureka-Arcata Route 101 Corridor Improvement Project back to square one. Caltrans later in the day pledged $1 million toward a bay trail.

"Unless we can help the project meet with their terms, they have no other choice but to say 'no' to the current proposal," 3rd District Supervisor Mark Lovelace said. "I've looked and looked, and I'm not aware of any other alternative that can meet all the needs of this corridor."

Before Caltrans established the 50 mph safety corridor between Arcata and Eureka on Highway 101 in May 2002, collision rates at four of the six intersections along the route were higher than statewide averages. During its first year, collisions dropped by 45 percent -- with an 80 percent drop at the intersections. According to Caltrans, rates increased at Mid-City Motor World and Indianola Cutoff.

Caltrans officials said safety corridors are generally considered ineffective because drivers eventually revert to former habits. On Thursday, they will present a proposed solution at a public Coastal Commission federal consistency hearing in Eureka's Wharfinger Building.

Caltrans officials want a $46 million project for a signaled intersection at Airport Road/Jacobs Avenue, a raised interchange at Indianola and the closure of median crossings at Mid-City Motor World, California Redwood sawmill, Bracut and Bayside Cutoff. Officials also propose the removal of 20 to 40 Monterey cypress and Monterey pine trees along the roadway.

Under Caltrans' current proposal, 240,000 cubic yards of fill will be used to raise the highway by 25 feet so cross traffic can pass below. Caltrans officials say the interchange will have a "compact" design, meaning sloped with on- and off-ramps will be at maximum grade for a smaller overall footprint. Caltrans also plans to seed the medians with grasses, and has proposed the areas for wetlands mitigation sites. The entire proposed project is estimated to take three years.

Lovelace said the commission has asked Caltrans officials to commit to a public trail, provide additional information on their plans for wetlands mitigation, and eliminate the interchange from the proposal in order to be consistent with the California Coastal Act.

Both Lovelace and 4th District Supervisor Virginia Bass said Caltrans officials have told them that they are "comfortable making commitments" to the trail and mitigation plans, but would like to move forward with the interchange.

Commission staff argued in a rejection report that the act will only allow for road expansion " ... where there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative." The act also mandates that development is designed to protect views along scenic coastal areas. The report states that the area around Indianola is considered a Coastal Scenic Area, citing the Humboldt County Land Use Plan.

Tuesday's unanimous vote allowed Board Chairman and 5th District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg to sign a letter in support of a unified solution, and designated Lovelace and Bass as representatives for the county at the hearing.

Northcoast Environmental Center Executive Director Dan Ehresman said his group will stand in support of the commission staff's rejection of the proposal. "We find the project incomplete," he said. "Caltrans has not made any changes in its plan for the interchange."

He said that he hadn't seen anything official for the trail yet, and there are options for wetland mitigation that have not been explored.

"As a condition of Coastal Consistency, Caltrans has agreed that project construction will not begin before funding is secured for a bay trail project," the release said. "This funding will include $1 million from Caltrans. The Humboldt County Association of Governments (HCAOG) is also seeking to secure funding for the bay trail project."

Humboldt Baykeeper Executive Director Jessica Hall said Caltrans should have been studying other alternatives more thoroughly, and her group will also be advocating rejection.

"Constructing an interchange and closing off the medians will ultimately change the behavior of drivers, and limit access for the communities along the highway," Hall said. "At higher speeds, people make more careless mistakes. We may not get the same types of accidents that we have now, but those are the things that need to be explored."

Hall, a Bayside resident, said drivers in that area would have to use Old Arcata Road, which is maintained by the county, to access Highway 101.

Bass said Coastal Commission officials have told her that they have only received letters against the project. "I don't see it going anywhere ever again if the project gets rejected," she said, and added that the commission is tasked with making sure proposals are consistent with the Coastal Act. "The Coastal Act has nothing in it about safety."

Lovelace said that if the proposal goes forward after the hearing, the next step would be filing Coastal Development Permits through the commission, the county, Eureka and Arcata.

"If this goes forward after Thursday, the two trail options can be explored during the permitting process," he said. "It buys us time between now and the permits."